cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

bUMP GUYS, THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC AND YOU SHOULD LISTEN TO ME. wHY DO YOOU GUYS IGNORE THIS POST ITS IMPORTANT AND IT PROVES THAT cHARLES dARWIN DOES NOT EXIST. cHARLES dARWIN HAS NO EVIDENCE. iF i SAY THAT AN INVISIBLE PINK UNICORN CREATED EVOLUTION i NEED PROOF, SO ATHEISTS NEED PROOF FOR THERE DEITY'S EXISTENCE.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

No offense, but even a Christian should know that a claim concerning the existence of a man is nowhere near as extraordinary as a claim concerning the existence of God. After all, we see men all around us every day, and if Charles Darwin didn't exist it doesn't change the existence of the TOE.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

No offense, but even a Christian should know that a claim concerning the existence of a man is nowhere near as extraordinary as a claim concerning the existence of God. After all, we see men all around us every day, and if Charles Darwin didn't exist it doesn't change the existence of the TOE.

yOU MUST BE A EVIL ATHEIST WHO BELIEVES THAT cHARLES dARWIN IS REAL! yOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR BELIEVING IN THAT BRAINWASHING AND LIE BECAUSE dARWIN IS YOUR IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE BRAINWASHED AND RELIGION LIKE dARWIN'S ARE THE SOURCE OF ALL EVIL AS WELL AS ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION!

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

No offense, but even a Christian should know that a claim concerning the existence of a man is nowhere near as extraordinary as a claim concerning the existence of God. After all, we see men all around us every day, and if Charles Darwin didn't exist it doesn't change the existence of the TOE.

yOU MUST BE A EVIL ATHEIST WHO BELIEVES THAT cHARLES dARWIN IS REAL! yOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR BELIEVING IN THAT BRAINWASHING AND LIE BECAUSE dARWIN IS YOUR IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE BRAINWASHED AND RELIGION LIKE dARWIN'S ARE THE SOURCE OF ALL EVIL AS WELL AS ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION!

Cute. Answer me this: If we were friends and you saw me one day with a bump on my head then you might ask me how I got it. Would you be more likely to believe me if I said I bumped it on the door-frame, or if I said I bumped it on an invisible alien flying saucer? I can appreciate the message you are trying to make, but you aren't stating it very well.

Nope, Charles Darwin doesn't exist. He died. And that's what happens when you die; you - the person - cease to exist. But unlike Jesus, Charles Darwin left behind actual evidence of his existence. Jesus was only God so writing something down, or leaving artifacts behind to show he actually existed was way beyond his ability.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Name a religious figure from the time of Jesus with the implied importance of Jesus.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Name a religious figure from the time of Jesus with the implied importance of Jesus.

Name a religious figure period with the implied importance of Jesus.

Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

Huh?? I have been to the natural history museum nearly a dozen times and never seen Darwin's Grave.... Need to look harder next time...

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

Nevermind, it's at Westminister Abbey.... hmm strange there should be some interesting stories about that given the events of his time...

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

Nevermind, it's at Westminister Abbey.... hmm strange there should be some interesting stories about that given the events of his time...

Good catch. You had me scratching my head wondering what you were talking about.

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

Nevermind, it's at Westminister Abbey.... hmm strange there should be some interesting stories about that given the events of his time...

Good catch. You had me scratching my head wondering what you were talking about.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

Worse than slaves man ...

You are not qualified to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about accountability. You can not even control yourself, much less anyone else. When you can carry on a discussion which does not involve insults every other sentence, then I may consider what you have to say about accountability and integrity. Until then, move along, sir, nothing to see here.

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

Worse than slaves man ...

You are not qualified to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about accountability. You can not even control yourself, much less anyone else. When you can carry on a discussion which does not involve insults every other sentence, then I may consider what you have to say about accountability and integrity. Until then, move along, sir, nothing to see here.

Standard.

Pointing outr your inconsisties in not lecturing you - its pinting out your inconsistencies.

But, please, instead of consummate victimization and hypocrisy, coupled with lashing out, why not make a case?

Please explain to the wider audience how applying the standards of the Christ Myth to deny something obviously, like Darwin (who also clearly existed), is supposed to be mocked and dismissd as trolling.

However, the Christ Myth is supposed to be treated as a serious academic discussion rater the dismissed as tomfollery, becaus atheists, who have never read any of the actual schoalrship, suddenly have a miraculous ability to translate - with utter perfection - ancient documents in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew in documents that have not ever read, all while pretending that ripping it blidly off thoroughly debunked 'scholars' makes it a valid and non-trolling academic issue that require the utmost respect and decorum.

Its just ANOTHER demonstration of the hypocorsy of atheism, and so obtuse and arrogant are the defenders that being hoisted by their own petard is dismissed as trolling ... while their own standars are avoided. You are not hypocrites, just victims of trolling - because OBVIOUSLY the reason used to dismiss Darwin are ... silly. Just not Jesus, the founder of the larget religion in the world - THEN the standards are serious academia.

The point that you clearly and deliberately dismissed while once again playting the consummate victim.

At 9/4/2014 4:21:38 PM, YamaVonKarma wrote:What drugs are you on? We have D.N.A.

What drugs are you on? We have a pile of documents that would prove any other historical contemporary of Jesus beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Beisdes, and to put the issue is glaring reality, its clear that the DNA was faked - its just some dude's DNA dug up from any random old grave, and clearly put there by atheist period scholars. (Wells) I mean the very concept of evolution was just stolen from the Aztecs anyway (Price) And biology is a science, it has nothing to do with Darwin - who is clearly fake (Dorherty). All these people who come out in support of Darwin are biased and just not real scholars like me (Carrier).

Does it work for you to be standing there pointing at evidence when those are the rebuttals?

Poor, poor atheists, just can't STAND to be treated the way you treat others - absolutely infuriates you - but not a one of you can stop for a second and figure out that treating OTHERS that way might also infuriate them. Go figure.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

Worse than slaves man ...

You are not qualified to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about accountability. You can not even control yourself, much less anyone else. When you can carry on a discussion which does not involve insults every other sentence, then I may consider what you have to say about accountability and integrity. Until then, move along, sir, nothing to see here.

Standard.

Pointing outr your inconsisties in not lecturing you - its pinting out your inconsistencies.

Is it inconcsistent for me to accept the evidence Charles Darwin existed as well as historical Jesus based on the evidence? I believe I am pretty consistent on that, so you're lecturing me on inconcsistencies of other people...

But, please, instead of consummate victimization and hypocrisy, coupled with lashing out, why not make a case?

A case why I believe in historical Jesus?

Please explain to the wider audience how applying the standards of the Christ Myth to deny something obviously, like Darwin (who also clearly existed), is supposed to be mocked and dismissd as trolling.

It is obvious trolling...do you not recognize the "troll" font?

However, the Christ Myth is supposed to be treated as a serious academic discussion rater the dismissed as tomfollery, becaus atheists, who have never read any of the actual schoalrship, suddenly have a miraculous ability to translate - with utter perfection - ancient documents in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew in documents that have not ever read, all while pretending that ripping it blidly off thoroughly debunked 'scholars' makes it a valid and non-trolling academic issue that require the utmost respect and decorum.

Sigh... that is not my belief. Why do you insist on trying to make me defend the actions of other people?

Its just ANOTHER demonstration of the hypocorsy of atheism, and so obtuse and arrogant are the defenders that being hoisted by their own petard is dismissed as trolling ... while their own standars are avoided. You are not hypocrites, just victims of trolling - because OBVIOUSLY the reason used to dismiss Darwin are ... silly. Just not Jesus, the founder of the larget religion in the world - THEN the standards are serious academia.

The reasons listed in this troll post are obviously meant to be silly, and are only a charicature of the Jesus mythicists claims.

The point that you clearly and deliberately dismissed while once again playting the consummate victim.

Right. Whatever you say.....

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

Worse than slaves man ...

You are not qualified to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about accountability. You can not even control yourself, much less anyone else. When you can carry on a discussion which does not involve insults every other sentence, then I may consider what you have to say about accountability and integrity. Until then, move along, sir, nothing to see here.

Standard.

Pointing outr your inconsisties in not lecturing you - its pinting out your inconsistencies.

Is it inconcsistent for me to accept the evidence Charles Darwin existed as well as historical Jesus based on the evidence? I believe I am pretty consistent on that, so you're lecturing me on inconcsistencies of other people...

But, please, instead of consummate victimization and hypocrisy, coupled with lashing out, why not make a case?

A case why I believe in historical Jesus?

Please explain to the wider audience how applying the standards of the Christ Myth to deny something obviously, like Darwin (who also clearly existed), is supposed to be mocked and dismissd as trolling.

It is obvious trolling...do you not recognize the "troll" font?

However, the Christ Myth is supposed to be treated as a serious academic discussion rater the dismissed as tomfollery, becaus atheists, who have never read any of the actual schoalrship, suddenly have a miraculous ability to translate - with utter perfection - ancient documents in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew in documents that have not ever read, all while pretending that ripping it blidly off thoroughly debunked 'scholars' makes it a valid and non-trolling academic issue that require the utmost respect and decorum.

Sigh... that is not my belief. Why do you insist on trying to make me defend the actions of other people?

Its just ANOTHER demonstration of the hypocorsy of atheism, and so obtuse and arrogant are the defenders that being hoisted by their own petard is dismissed as trolling ... while their own standars are avoided. You are not hypocrites, just victims of trolling - because OBVIOUSLY the reason used to dismiss Darwin are ... silly. Just not Jesus, the founder of the larget religion in the world - THEN the standards are serious academia.

The reasons listed in this troll post are obviously meant to be silly, and are only a charicature of the Jesus mythicists claims.

The point that you clearly and deliberately dismissed while once again playting the consummate victim.

Right. Whatever you say.....

So, consummate victim troll strikes, whose sole contribution to discussion is to disparagethe character of others (which is aggressive) while accusing others of being aggreesive and insulting and pretending to take the high road while further smothering himself in crap ...

It would be nice to see you concede an obvious point - that if something is OBVIOUSLY mocking Jesus Mythers, that it might be out of line to come in and side with the mythicists and mock the position as unreasonable without having to be tapped to point out that you are missing the point.

But that is not, and never is, what you are about. Its all about coming in and stinking up the place with vapid accusations of tyranny - which upon examining are hyperbole - and victimzed trolling - egad! - onely when we examine them we find atheists are HEAVILY engaged the same conduct, while demanding it be treated as academics rather than trolling.

In short, you are here to gloat because 'atheism' - which is apparently you - MUST be better than religion! Angosh dern it we'll show you ...

... only you get rebutted and descend into angry inchoerent rants belying and rational basis for your nihilistic tendancies.

You are just another angry atheist of average intellectual ability.

But enjoy crapping on people of different faith you dare to defend it, I am sure that will help.

At 9/4/2014 1:25:53 PM, jh1234l wrote:cHARLES dARWIN DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE ATHEIST TO PROVE THAT HE EXISTS. tHERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTED OTHER THAN A BOOK AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT ITS JUST A BOOK, wHERE IS THE SCIENTIFIC, EMPERICAL, AND PLACEBO-FREE EVIDENCE FOR cHARLES dARWIN? i'M NOT STUPID OR DENIALIST i'M JUST A SKEPTIC WHO FOLLOWS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

aTHEISTS MAKE THE EXTRAORDINARY CLAIM THAT cHARLES dARWIN EXISTS AND THEREFORE WE EXPECT EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE. gIVE ME A FEW LOCKS OF HAIR FROM cHARLES dARWIN'S ARMPIT, i DARE YOU ATHEISTS. rEMEMBER THAT YOUR DEITY cHARLES dARWIN IS ACTUALLY AN IMAGINARY FRIEND AND YOU ARE ALL DELUSIONAL AND BRAINWASHED BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE HE EXISTS EVEN THOUGH THE BOP IS ON YOU.

So, consummate victim troll strikes, whose sole contribution to discussion is to disparagethe character of others (which is aggressive) while accusing others of being aggreesive and insulting and pretending to take the high road while further smothering himself in crap ...

It would be nice to see you concede an obvious point - that if something is OBVIOUSLY mocking Jesus Mythers, that it might be out of line to come in and side with the mythicists and mock the position as unreasonable without having to be tapped to point out that you are missing the point.

But that is not, and never is, what you are about. Its all about coming in and stinking up the place with vapid accusations of tyranny - which upon examining are hyperbole - and victimzed trolling - egad! - onely when we examine them we find atheists are HEAVILY engaged the same conduct, while demanding it be treated as academics rather than trolling.

In short, you are here to gloat because 'atheism' - which is apparently you - MUST be better than religion! Angosh dern it we'll show you ...

... only you get rebutted and descend into angry inchoerent rants belying and rational basis for your nihilistic tendancies.

You are just another angry atheist of average intellectual ability.

But enjoy crapping on people of different faith you dare to defend it, I am sure that will help.

A classic example of what happens when some people are taught to hate, taught to loathe, taught to become instantly enraged at the thought that anyone on the planet might be different, think differently, or assess things differently... so that it's easy to kill people you don't know and never met.

...and then you're dumped right back onto society with little - if any - debriefing.

I do wish that the military would take some responsibility to try to undo the damage they do before unleashing their unsuspecting victims back onto an unsuspecting society.

You come here willingly, each and every day, to engage with others who you know do not hold the beliefs which you hold, and you become intensely angered when they question your beliefs, and even show them to be - not just wrong - but often silly and wrong. You unleash your rage, elevate your hatred of all who are different than you, and then return to do it all over again, each and every day.

I know you're trolling, but the evidence for Charles Darwin enjoys a much higher standard of evidence than that of Jesus. While I agree there is sufficient evidence for a historical human name Jesus who played a huge role in Christianity, if we are to consider the claims of historical Jesus and especially those of a divine Jesus, then standard of evidence is far below that of Charles Darwin.

And yet, by the same standard you deny Jesus, we can deny Darwin.

And yes, Darwin being less than two hundred as opposed to two thousand, does have more evidence, but any excuse can be used to deny it just as you atheists do us. the simple fact of the matter is that there is more evidence for Jesus, than virtually any contemporary religious figure from the period - with the exception of Paul.

Atheists NEVER deny any of them.

Yet when someone uses the same tactics to deny Darwin ... NOW its trolling?

So what do you think all the looney tunes Christ Myth atheists are? Right - trolls.

But it has to be rubbed in YOUR face, with one of YOUR prophets, before you will acknowledge that its trolling ... and then ignore what Christ mythers do to Christians with the Christ Myth anyway.

What a shock to find you again asking for one standard for you, and another for Christians.

Standards atheists. They actually matter. And if you resent this trolling? Well, I suggest you take action against the Christ Myth trollers who long ago dumped the pretext of reasonableness.

Either the Christ Myth is kosher, and thus threads like this are genuine academic questions, or they are not.

Pretending that there is a difference in approach between this thread and a standard BS Christ Denial thread is chutzpah.

Demanding what I do with my freedom of speech? That is tyrannical! ;-)

...but seriously, go f yourself. I make comments on what interests me.

I jut point out the hypocrisy in the comments you make. Somehow, the concept of standards and accountability infringes your rights?

Worse than slaves man ...

You are not qualified to lecture me, or anyone else for that matter, about accountability. You can not even control yourself, much less anyone else. When you can carry on a discussion which does not involve insults every other sentence, then I may consider what you have to say about accountability and integrity. Until then, move along, sir, nothing to see here.

Standard.

Pointing outr your inconsisties in not lecturing you - its pinting out your inconsistencies.

Is it inconcsistent for me to accept the evidence Charles Darwin existed as well as historical Jesus based on the evidence? I believe I am pretty consistent on that, so you're lecturing me on inconcsistencies of other people...

But, please, instead of consummate victimization and hypocrisy, coupled with lashing out, why not make a case?

A case why I believe in historical Jesus?

Please explain to the wider audience how applying the standards of the Christ Myth to deny something obviously, like Darwin (who also clearly existed), is supposed to be mocked and dismissd as trolling.

It is obvious trolling...do you not recognize the "troll" font?

However, the Christ Myth is supposed to be treated as a serious academic discussion rater the dismissed as tomfollery, becaus atheists, who have never read any of the actual schoalrship, suddenly have a miraculous ability to translate - with utter perfection - ancient documents in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew in documents that have not ever read, all while pretending that ripping it blidly off thoroughly debunked 'scholars' makes it a valid and non-trolling academic issue that require the utmost respect and decorum.

Sigh... that is not my belief. Why do you insist on trying to make me defend the actions of other people?

Its just ANOTHER demonstration of the hypocorsy of atheism, and so obtuse and arrogant are the defenders that being hoisted by their own petard is dismissed as trolling ... while their own standars are avoided. You are not hypocrites, just victims of trolling - because OBVIOUSLY the reason used to dismiss Darwin are ... silly. Just not Jesus, the founder of the larget religion in the world - THEN the standards are serious academia.

The reasons listed in this troll post are obviously meant to be silly, and are only a charicature of the Jesus mythicists claims.

The point that you clearly and deliberately dismissed while once again playting the consummate victim.

Right. Whatever you say.....

So, consummate victim troll strikes, whose sole contribution to discussion is to disparagethe character of others (which is aggressive) while accusing others of being aggreesive and insulting and pretending to take the high road while further smothering himself in crap ...

It would be nice to see you concede an obvious point - that if something is OBVIOUSLY mocking Jesus Mythers, that it might be out of line to come in and side with the mythicists and mock the position as unreasonable without having to be tapped to point out that you are missing the point.

But that is not, and never is, what you are about. Its all about coming in and stinking up the place with vapid accusations of tyranny - which upon examining are hyperbole - and victimzed trolling - egad! - onely when we examine them we find atheists are HEAVILY engaged the same conduct, while demanding it be treated as academics rather than trolling.

In short, you are here to gloat because 'atheism' - which is apparently you - MUST be better than religion! Angosh dern it we'll show you ...

... only you get rebutted and descend into angry inchoerent rants belying and rational basis for your nihilistic tendancies.

You are just another angry atheist of average intellectual ability.

But enjoy crapping on people of different faith you dare to defend it, I am sure that will help.

Is your need for an argument overwhelming you? Go bug someone else, I'm not interested in playing any games with you today.

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten

A classic example of what happens when some people are taught to hate, taught to loathe, taught to become instantly enraged at the thought that anyone on the planet might be different, think differently, or assess things differently...

Right - its hatred to be an atheist, read scholarship rather than listen to Satanistic fantasies and discover that they don;t hold water and are just conspiracy theories and to reject them as such.

Its 'hatred' to note that conspiracy theorists keep coming back and employ the same dead argument to absurdity and note what that is in terms of the standards of logic.

And of course, being subjected to stalking, double standards, continuous character assassination, and emotive temper tantrums for daring to stand up to conspiracy theorists is 'hatred'.

Amazingly enough, these same conspiracy theorists view themselves as the most intelligent capable people in the world, but also view their lack of success as a byproduct of the stupidity of others who conspiratorially block them.

Really, atheists are victims of hatred - because someone has a different opinion than them ... but ... er ... whatever the opposite of that religious guy said.

Is your need for an argument overwhelming you? Go bug someone else, I'm not interested in playing any games with you today.

ROFL ... yes, because your .. agh, I wouldn't call in participation exactly, is anything other than voluntary is it?

Please, continue to issue vapid commands through the internet like someone is then required to follow your commands - or else ... er, you will issue more vapid commands through the internet.

And that is its OK for atheists to deny Christ by standards that applied to them are loathsome trolling. Downright hatred. And let us tell you how hateful you are by applying the same standards to us that we do you you!

Obviously, you Christians don;t get it! Did you see the command I issued! Iam in charge of the internet. Sooner you Christians learn that and stop asking us to apply logical standards and argumentation .. the sooner this here atheist .. er, 'religion' forum will be run properly!

We judge! Not you! Got it Christians!!!!

(God, I mean no God, I wish they would just acknowledge their inferiority to me!)

Is your need for an argument overwhelming you? Go bug someone else, I'm not interested in playing any games with you today.

ROFL ... yes, because your .. agh, I wouldn't call in participation exactly, is anything other than voluntary is it?

Please, continue to issue vapid commands through the internet like someone is then required to follow your commands - or else ... er, you will issue more vapid commands through the internet.

And that is its OK for atheists to deny Christ by standards that applied to them are loathsome trolling. Downright hatred. And let us tell you how hateful you are by applying the same standards to us that we do you you!

Obviously, you Christians don;t get it! Did you see the command I issued! Iam in charge of the internet. Sooner you Christians learn that and stop asking us to apply logical standards and argumentation .. the sooner this here atheist .. er, 'religion' forum will be run properly!

We judge! Not you! Got it Christians!!!!

(God, I mean no God, I wish they would just acknowledge their inferiority to me!)

Hmm, so you trolling is somehow beyond your own call for standards?

Well, thanks for that completely rational post. You have certainly made a cogent case. I have seen the err of my ways. Perhaps, I may even consider adopting the same religion which has given you the ability to see the world through the eyes of a loving god. I can see it has made you such a wonderful person that people naturally gravitate to because of your grace and tolerance. Yay, Jesus!

This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten